O comércio de café descafeinado constitui 10% das vendas mundiais de café, sendo preferido pelos consumidores que não desejam ou são sensíveis aos efeitos da cafeína. Este artigo apresenta uma comparação analítica de métodos por eletroforese capilar (CE) e cromatografia líquida de alta eficiência (HPLC) para a quantificação de cafeína residual em café descafeinado, quanto aos parâmetros de validação, custos, tempo de análise, composição e tratamento dos resíduos gerados, bem como quantificação de cafeína em 20 amostras comerciais. Ambos os métodos apresentaram parâmetros de validação adequados. O teor de cafeína não diferiu estatisticamente pelos dois métodos. A vantagem do método por HPLC foi o limite de detecção 42 vezes mais baixo. Não obstante, o limite de detecção da CE foi 115 vezes menor do que o permitido pela legislação brasileira. A análise por CE foi 30% mais rápida, os custos com reagentes foram 76,5 vezes mais baixos e o volume de resíduos gerados foi 33 vezes menor. Portanto, o método por CE mostrou-se uma valiosa ferramenta analítica para este tipo de análise.

Decaffeinated coffee accounts for 10 percent of coffee sales in the world; it is preferred by consumers that do not wish or are sensitive to caffeine effects. This article presents an analytical comparison of capillary electrophoresis (CE) and high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) methods for residual caffeine quantification in decaffeinated coffee in terms of validation parameters, costs, analysis time, composition and treatment of the residues generated, and caffeine quantification in 20 commercial samples. Both methods showed suitable validation parameters. Caffeine content did not differ statistically in the two different methods of analysis. The main advantage of the high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method was the 42-fold lower detection limit. Nevertheless, the capillary electrophoresis (CE) detection limit was 115-fold lower than the allowable limit by the Brazilian law. The capillary electrophoresis (CE) analyses were 30% faster, the reagent costs were 76.5-fold, and the volume of the residues generated was 33-fold lower. Therefore, the capillary electrophoresis (CE) method proved to be a valuable analytical tool for this type of analysis.

Although the hypothesis that environmental chemicals may exhibit endocrine disrupting effects is not new, the issue has been a growing level of concern due to reports of increased incidences of endocrine-related disease in humans, including declining male fertility, and more significantly, to adverse physiological effects observed in wildlife where cause and effect relationships are more evident. The list of endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) includes a range of anthropogenic compounds, phytoestrogens, naturally occurring sex steroids and synthetic estrogens. Within the aquatic environment, the presence of EDCs has concerned many scientists and water quality regulators. Discharge of effluents from treatment facilities is likely to be a significant source of input of contaminants to many systems, and the potential for concentration of hydrophilic compounds and transformation products within sludges has implications for their disposal. Then, understanding the processes and the fate of EDCs on the environment, as well as the mechanisms of endocrine disruption, may facilitate controlling or limiting exposure of both humans and the environment to these compounds.